Catholic Weddings

Interesting article regarding secular pressure/control over religious freedom.

This article (click), written by a friend of mine, is really interesting. It is scary that society is choosing to ignore infringement on certain group's freedoms over others. It's nice to know some are still willing to fight for it. I've heard the President of Belmont Abbey College said he would shut down the school before accepting the healthcare mandate.

I also agree with the statement re: "Merry Christmas" vs. "Happy Holidays/Season's Greetings". Though it used to bother me, now that I think about it, I'd rather NOT have the non-Christ-centric aspects of the holiday directly linked with "Christmas".

Any thoughts on this stuff?

Re: Interesting article regarding secular pressure/control over religious freedom.

  • caitriona87caitriona87 member
    First Anniversary First Comment
    edited December 2011
    This stuff scares me so much. There was a period earlier this year (which I think mostly had to do with my shaky state after my son died) where it kept me up nights and I literally never stopped thinking about it. That's gotten better, thank God. The objective situation, on the other hand, not so much. I know that long term the Church always survives and triumphs but that doesn't mean there won't be terrible suffering in the short term.

    One thing that is heartening is that I am reading more and more articles on this order lately (even in my local newspaper)--which means lots of people are noticing and perturbed by it--and I hope and pray that it will be stopped before it goes any further. There are still a lot of traditionally-minded Christians and Jews in the US...I think (hope) too many to let it go too far. I just pray a lot, lol. Our patroness is Our Lady under her title of Immaculate Conception so I just ask her to take care of us.

    Though that reminds me that some here are not in the US...it *seems* like things are worse in Canada and Europe but of course I don't really know, not living there myself. I have heard some scary stuff about the hate speech tribunals in Canada. I'd be interested to hear from anybody there about whether all of that is accurate or not.
    Warning No formatter is installed for the format bbhtml
  • edited December 2011
    "Happy Holidays" doesn't really bother me because I do think it is right to include other religions that have holidays during this time period.

    Until very recently, the use of "XMas" instead of Christmas really bugged me...I thought it was incredibly rude and "taking Christ out of Christmas." I know people use it meaning to do just that, but reading the history of it, I now find it hilarious!

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xmas

    I do think Islam tends to be much more respected than Christianity in the US, and I do find that sad.
    Click Here for Bio Image and video hosting by TinyPic Married June 12, 2010!
  • doctabroccolidoctabroccoli member
    First Comment
    edited December 2011
    As a moderate, I don't 100% agree with your friend's column, but I don't 100% disagree either.  Our politicians right now are seemingly at the far extremes - either shoving government down your throat or shoving religion down your throat.  Nobody is winning right now, in my opinion, because of this.
    BabyFruit Ticker
    Waiting to meet the baby broccoli on 5/5/2013!
  • edited December 2011
    Like Docta, this is a thing I struggle with.  I think the insurance thing is a really interesting point, and I have a hard time with it.

    Other things (i.e., not being able to discriminate against an unmarried couple in renting your basement) seem legitimate to me.  To me, you are free to live your faith until the exercise of that faith infringes upon others - and this is a case where I think it does.  Granted, I say that as a person who, although Catholic, really firmly believes that most "business" dealings in this country should be relatively free from religious influence.  The US was purposefully founded with no specific religion for pretty good reason, in my mind.  The balance between an individual's right to practice their religion and the government's right/responsibility to regulate commerce is tricky, however.
  • agapecarrieagapecarrie member
    First Anniversary 5 Love Its Combo Breaker First Comment
    edited December 2011
    Pre-marital sex is a serious sin. Like all sin does , it invites evil in- creates spiritual warfare. I have every right to protect my house from this. I have my house blessed to protect it. As soon as I willingly allow and invite serious sin to take place under my roof, I've negated that protection.
  • edited December 2011

    The landlord has the right to refuse to rent his home.  There was a house not far from my college that was available for rent for "Single, Christian women."  In a fairly liberal area, and of course no one would sue the owner for seeking out one type of tenant.

    @Marissa: I am a huge Futurama fan, and the "Xmas Story" episode is one of my favorites.

    I don't think one religion is more or less "respected" than others in the US.  I think that people who speak loudly of their beliefs tend to get shot down or brushed off as zealots, and that's a shame.

    A few years ago I had to complete a training on religious tolerance in public schools, which was especially poignant because my particular school has a large Muslim population.  We were discussing the fact that these students must have access to a private room to pray each day at a given time, and a member of my group shouted, "Why don't they do that for the Christians?!" as though this was some affront against him.  I pointed out that any Christian student could more than likely request and receive a private place to pray, but that since it wasn't a scheduled event, it had probably never come up.  It was one of those, "You don't realize what you don't have until someone else gets it," kind of moments.

    Incidentally, they don't offer the prayer room to teachers.  We had a Muslim student teacher who was told she'd just have to use her conference period to go to a mosque to pray.  I found that pretty shady.

    Anniversary

    image

    image

  • edited December 2011
    Then agape, your option is to not rent your basement at all, to anyone. By choosing to engage in commerce, you are choosing to be subject the laws governing it. It is patently discriminatory to not rent to a couple based on race or religion, and I find this to be really similar. I agree government needs to protect religion, but as I said before, there is a balance with protecting the rights of others - in this case the right of people to have equal and fair access to housing.
  • Calypso1977Calypso1977 member
    First Anniversary 5 Love Its First Answer Combo Breaker
    edited December 2011
    i think this article is spot on.

    nancy pelosi, the entire kennedy family, and other "catholic" politicians disgust me with their continual support of abortion.  you cant be catholic and pro-abortion!

  • Riss91Riss91 member
    First Anniversary 5 Love Its Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    edited December 2011
    Meg - you could also turn that around and say that the couple can just choose to rent somewhere else. Also, I think there is a huge difference between public sector and private sector. And the definition of "rights" is tricky. What is a right vs. a privelidge, etc.

    I think there is a balance that must be kept. Religious groups should be allowed to follow their own religion, without being forced into practices that violate their beliefs.  There was a lot of concern that parishes/priests would be violating the law by refusing to perform marriages for gay couples, in states where gay marriage was legalized.

    And on the other side, religious groups can't expect the government to structure the entire legal system around their specific beliefs. For instance, we shouldn't have a governmental law that everyone has to go to church on Sunday...

    In this article, I don't see rejecting coverage of birth control pills as something that infringe's upon someone's rights. If you attend the school mentioned, and still want to use the pill, you can still get it, you'd just pay for it outright (or go to a place that will help you subsidize it).  The school isn't denying enrollment to pill-users, it just doesn't want to be forced to pay for it/endorse its use.
  • edited December 2011
    In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_interesting-article-regarding-secular-pressurecontrol-over-religious-freedom?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural Wedding BoardsForum:615Discussion:3622aefb-6068-4639-8cd8-ac3d01e3c33dPost:8c4b0f7e-ac46-4d5b-a587-162f5a1cf972">Re: Interesting article regarding secular pressure/control over religious freedom.</a>:
    [QUOTE]Meg - you could also turn that around and say that the couple can just choose to rent somewhere else. Also, I think there is a huge difference between public sector and private sector. And the definition of "rights" is tricky. What is a right vs. a privelidge, etc. I think there is a balance that must be kept. Religious groups should be allowed to follow their own religion, without being forced into practices that violate their beliefs.  There was a lot of concern that parishes/priests would be violating the law by refusing to perform marriages for gay couples, in states where gay marriage was legalized. And on the other side, religious groups can't expect the government to structure the entire legal system around their specific beliefs. For instance, we shouldn't have a governmental law that everyone has to go to church on Sunday... In this article, I don't see rejecting coverage of birth control pills as something that infringe's upon someone's rights. If you attend the school mentioned, and still want to use the pill, you can still get it, you'd just pay for it outright (or go to a place that will help you subsidize it).  The school isn't denying enrollment to pill-users, it just doesn't want to be forced to pay for it/endorse its use.
    Posted by Riss91[/QUOTE]

    Riss - I really think you and I are saying the same thing, but that maybe our personal idea of where the balance lies is different.  For instance - I would certainly say there need to be protections in place so that religious organizations don't have to perform gay marriages.  I also agree that the definition of "rights" is tricky, as is the definition of "privelege" and that the rights/priveleges of different groups often conflict.  Getting married may be a right, but getting married in a church is not.  To me - fair access to places to live regardless of gender/race/relgiion is actually a right.  IMO, basic health care is (or should be a right), but having full health insurance for all your health care clearly is not.

    Um, so yeah.  Its tricky.  I agree with that.
  • agapecarrieagapecarrie member
    First Anniversary 5 Love Its Combo Breaker First Comment
    edited December 2011
    Abby Johnson (former Planned parenthood director) that had a conversion and now is exposing everything they do...she wrote in her blog  just the other day something related.


    Read the linked memo. This is fricken scary. 
  • caitriona87caitriona87 member
    First Anniversary First Comment
    edited December 2011
    In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_interesting-article-regarding-secular-pressurecontrol-over-religious-freedom?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:615Discussion:3622aefb-6068-4639-8cd8-ac3d01e3c33dPost:a251005c-beb5-4311-8010-bd8d767ff32b">Re: Interesting article regarding secular pressure/control over religious freedom.</a>:
    [QUOTE]Abby Johnson (former Planned parenthood director) that had a conversion and now is exposing everything they do...she wrote in her blog  just the other day something related. <a href="http://www.abbyjohnson.org/2011/11/jaffe-memo-no-more-babies/" rel='nofollow'>http://www.abbyjohnson.org/2011/11/jaffe-memo-no-more-babies/</a> Read the linked memo. This is fricken scary.  <a href="http://www.abbyjohnson.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/jaffememo.pdf" rel='nofollow'>http://www.abbyjohnson.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/jaffememo.pdf</a>
    Posted by agapecarrie[/QUOTE]

    Ugh ugh ugh. I *seriously* hope and pray that Catholics will wake up and stop voting for people who seek to destroy life, family, and the Church.
    Warning No formatter is installed for the format bbhtml
  • blush64blush64 member
    First Anniversary First Comment
    edited December 2011
    In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_interesting-article-regarding-secular-pressurecontrol-over-religious-freedom?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural Wedding BoardsForum:615Discussion:3622aefb-6068-4639-8cd8-ac3d01e3c33dPost:8b32dc93-dfbd-49d1-ab8f-fe970e41750a">Re: Interesting article regarding secular pressure/control over religious freedom.</a>:
    [QUOTE]This stuff scares me so much. There was a period earlier this year (which I think mostly had to do with my shaky state after my son died) where it kept me up nights and I literally never stopped thinking about it. That's gotten better, thank God. The objective situation, on the other hand, not so much. I know that long term the Church always survives and triumphs but that doesn't mean there won't be terrible suffering in the short term. One thing that is heartening is that I am reading more and more articles on this order lately (even in my local newspaper)--which means lots of people are noticing and perturbed by it--and I hope and pray that it will be stopped before it goes any further. There are still a lot of traditionally-minded Christians and Jews in the US...I think (hope) too many to let it go too far. I just pray a lot, lol. Our patroness is Our Lady under her title of Immaculate Conception so I just ask her to take care of us. Though that reminds me that some here are not in the US<strong>...it *seems* like things are worse in Canada and Europe but of course I don't really know, not living there myself. I have heard some scary stuff about the hate speech tribunals in Canada. I'd be interested to hear from anybody there about whether all of that is accurate or not.
    </strong>Posted by caitriona87[/QUOTE]

    I am in Toronto, Canada and I have no idea what you're talking about. A hate speech tribunal? Maybe it's just a different name, or something. What is it that's possibly happening here?

    I do know in public schools there is no mention of God allowed and that they have 'holiday plays' or 'winter celebrations' instead of Christmas plays/recitals.

    Catholic schools where I live are publicly funded and are free to attend just as public schools are.  For the most part I have attended Catholic schools as have my kids so we never had any issues with religion being mentioned or practised.

    I will edit soon.
  • caitriona87caitriona87 member
    First Anniversary First Comment
    edited December 2011
    Apparently the proper titles of these entities are either Human Rights Commission or Human Rights Tribunal depending upon the province. I'm sorry for being unclear, it was on another message board where someone in Canada used the phrase "hate speech tribunal."  Now I've done a bit more reading on it. These bodies' enforcement of Section 13 of the Human Rights Act has on several occasions been used against Catholic priests and laity to punish them for stating Catholic teaching as well as non-Catholics for their religious beliefs & expression.  See:

    http://catholicexchange.com/2008/06/04/112780/

    http://catholicexchange.com/2008/06/09/112825/

    http://www.catholicregister.org/news/canada/item/13142-supreme-court-hears-religious-freedom-arguments-against-hate-speech-codes-in-whatcott-case

    However, it appears that the section that allows this is set for repeal, about which I had not heard anything until just now:

    http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/breakthrough-canadian-gvmt-backs-repeal-of-hate-speech-clause?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+LifesitenewscomLatestHeadlines+(LifeSiteNews.com+Latest+Headlines)



    Warning No formatter is installed for the format bbhtml
  • edited December 2011
    In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_interesting-article-regarding-secular-pressurecontrol-over-religious-freedom?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:615Discussion:3622aefb-6068-4639-8cd8-ac3d01e3c33dPost:05f7b5bf-0dfd-44d5-bb8d-60c0c833460e">Re: Interesting article regarding secular pressure/control over religious freedom.</a>:
    [QUOTE]i think this article is spot on. nancy pelosi, the entire kennedy family, and other "catholic" politicians disgust me with their continual support of abortion.  you cant be catholic and pro-abortion!
    Posted by Calypso1977[/QUOTE]

    I haven't read the article yet. But calypso, I just wanted to say I agree with you.
  • blush64blush64 member
    First Anniversary First Comment
    edited December 2011
    In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_interesting-article-regarding-secular-pressurecontrol-over-religious-freedom?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural Wedding BoardsForum:615Discussion:3622aefb-6068-4639-8cd8-ac3d01e3c33dPost:19449d18-55d0-4bda-a3b3-790e2a5927c8">Re: Interesting article regarding secular pressure/control over religious freedom.</a>:
    [QUOTE]<strong>Apparently the proper titles of these entities are either Human Rights Commission or Human Rights Tribunal depending upon the province. I'm sorry for being unclear, it was on another message board where someone in Canada used the phrase "hate speech tribunal."</strong>  Now I've done a bit more reading on it. These bodies' enforcement of Section 13 of the Human Rights Act has on several occasions been used against Catholic priests and laity to punish them for stating Catholic teaching as well as non-Catholics for their religious beliefs & expression.  See: <a rel="nofollow" href="http://catholicexchange.com/2008/06/04/112780/">http://catholicexchange.com/2008/06/04/112780/</a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://catholicexchange.com/2008/06/09/112825/">http://catholicexchange.com/2008/06/09/112825/</a> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.catholicregister.org/news/canada/item/13142-supreme-court-hears-religious-freedom-arguments-against-hate-speech-codes-in-whatcott-case">http://www.catholicregister.org/news/canada/item/13142-supreme-court-hears-religious-freedom-arguments-against-hate-speech-codes-in-whatcott-case</a> However, it appears that the section that allows this is set for repeal, about which I had not heard anything until just now: <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/breakthrough-canadian-gvmt-backs-repeal-of-hate-speech-clause?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+LifesitenewscomLatestHeadlines+(LifeSiteNews.com+Latest+Headlines)">http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/breakthrough-canadian-gvmt-backs-repeal-of-hate-speech-clause?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+LifesitenewscomLatestHeadlines+(LifeSiteNews.com+Latest+Headlines)</a>
    Posted by caitriona87[/QUOTE]

    I assure you that whatever it may seem from the outside things stated there are NOT the norm.  There has always been a lot of misinformation regarding Canada. (especially health care) I live here and those cases are not the norm. Will "special interest groups" keep trying to do things like that? Probably. Does that mean they will always get away with it? No. Things go through the courts and then things can change.

    Reading those it seems like this is happening all over and people are scared to speak and it's just not true.

    EDIT MINI VENT--nothing to do with the issue at hand...Also interesting to read were the ignorant and rude comments about Canada made below the article by more than one person. There is so much confusion and misinformation or misleading information regarding Canada. (especially our health care) As a Canadian I find that sad. Also, nothing to do with anyone on this site. vent ended.

    AS for separating church and the laws of the country, I am ok with that as long as it's done for every religion. There are some of us speaking up to try to stop those things from happening. Have to edit later.
  • CiardasullyCiardasully member
    First Comment First Anniversary
    edited December 2011
    In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/cultural-wedding-boards_catholic-weddings_interesting-article-regarding-secular-pressurecontrol-over-religious-freedom?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Cultural%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:615Discussion:3622aefb-6068-4639-8cd8-ac3d01e3c33dPost:05f7b5bf-0dfd-44d5-bb8d-60c0c833460e">Re: Interesting article regarding secular pressure/control over religious freedom.</a>:
    [QUOTE]i think this article is spot on. nancy pelosi, the entire kennedy family, and other "catholic" politicians disgust me with their continual support of abortion.  you cant be catholic and pro-abortion!
    Posted by Calypso1977[/QUOTE]
     
    I agree.  It disgusts me when politicians (D and R) vote for abortion and then receive Communion. 
    PitaPata Cat tickers Anniversary
This discussion has been closed.
Choose Another Board
Search Boards